If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Gary, Just change the display mode to this thread to Linear and it becomes very easy to follow, since posts appear chronologically...The display mode appears near the top right hand corner...I hope that helps...
When you do that, it does make it easy to get to the last page - however, if people inject new replies elsewhere in the thread, it may be hard to find them... I prefer hybrid mode, but that too has drawbacks (having to constantly return with the back button to 'see' more posts that are marked 'new'). Of course, in a gigantic thread like this, the tree representation scrolls horizontally too - another PITA.
When you do that, it does make it easy to get to the last page - however, if people inject new replies elsewhere in the thread, it may be hard to find them
If, instead of clicking on the text of the thread title, you click on the little tick mark just to the left, then you go straight to the first unread message in the thread.
We just had an earthquake in Ottawa; it hit the U. of O. about 1:50 pm. I heard a rumble that got louder and then actually could see the walls shutter for a second or two; then it stopped. I would guess a 4 or so?
We just had an earthquake in Ottawa; it hit the U. of O. about 1:50 pm. I heard a rumble that got louder and then actually could see the walls shutter for a second or two; then it stopped. I would guess a 4 or so?
5.7, apparently.
The last quake I felt here on the West Coast was the 2001 Nisqually quake which caused much damage in Seattle, but here in View Royal it was just a bit of a "bang" where I live, because the house has no basement and is built right on very solid bedrock.
I can remember two good quakes around here, one in the 1960's (I was working in the Parliament buildings at the time) and one in the late 1970's, both around 5.5 with no significant damage.
My posting has been slow over last week or so since I am still on my climatology summer course; just got off the research ship Coriolis II a few days ago. We detected evidence for the 1663 earthquake and 1996 Saguenay flooding in the ocean sediment cores; and I discovered some interesting sediment features that people have not seen before.
One anecdote; many areas of the Arctic have had temperatures reach 15 Celcius every day for the last two weeks. One day or so is normal but 2 weeks is extremely unusual. Lakes that are normally ice free for only two months (August and September) are already ice free as of mid-June; thus they will likely be ice free for 4 months.
Google NSIDC and look at the extent of Arctic ice this year; we are tracking to a maximum melt year; passing the record of 2007. Climate change is accelerating rapidly.
One anecdote; many areas of the Arctic have had temperatures reach 15 Celcius every day for the last two weeks. One day or so is normal but 2 weeks is extremely unusual. Lakes that are normally ice free for only two months (August and September) are already ice free as of mid-June; thus they will likely be ice free for 4 months.
Google NSIDC and look at the extent of Arctic ice this year; we are tracking to a maximum melt year; passing the record of 2007. Climate change is accelerating rapidly.
Yeah, I guess things are hard all over. Millions of acres of farm land on the prairies that won't be planted this year because of the rain. The price of food, up she'll go.
Looks like the government has taken some steps on the solar energy. They caught on the ground mounted panels cost less than the rooftop ones so they cut the price they will pay for future production on new ones. Maybe when Hudak becomes premier he'll have a common sense revolution here in Ontario.
The natural gas crowd is rooting for a really hot summer. It goes like this. The hot temperatures cause people to use more air conditioning. That takes more electricity. A lot of the excess electricity comes from natural gas powered generation and increases the useage. Less natural gas goes into storage. The price of natural gas goes up. The sellers win. The pipelines which carry it win because a pipeline is like a bus. The more passengers (volume of natural gas), the higher the revenue. The companies which find the gas and sell it win. The government wins in higher tax revenue and royalties. Last, and certainly not least, the investors win.
There is a paper company in B.C. whose shares I like buying and selling. That sector of the economy has been having a real hard time and the shares of the company trade for pennies.
They have 4 mills in Canada and one or more in the U.S. They recently got new management so I bought a whack of shares for not much. One mill has been closed down but they brought in new management. I thought maybe they could work out something with the uniions and city to become more competitive.
I like to buy into companies which make stuff and provide employment.
Anyhow, they annouced they are closing the idle mill permanently. I guess they will need fewer trees.
I don't know what they will do with the equipment. I used to do service work at industrial plants. When they shut down during economic slowdowns they would empty out the machinery and move it. Then they would level the buildings to the ground and haul away the rubble. Taxes on vacant land tends to be lower.
I guess now I'm playing a reorganization and it's worth less than I paid - but not much less.
*The real Climategate scandal *
Controversies over credibility of climate science have been
intentionally contrived
By Brad Walters
Sat. Jul 10, The Halifax Chronicle Herald http://thechronicleherald.ca/Letters/1191216.html
The long-awaited release of the Russell panel report in the U.K. should
finally put to rest the scientific controversies surrounding the
so-called Climategate scandal, in which leaked emails from a renowned
climate research group at East Anglia led some to question the
credibility of global-warming science.
The Russell report’s conclusions are clear: There was no evidence of
scientific malpractice and no reason to doubt the credibility of the
scientific claims being made by the East Anglia researchers. Four
previous reviews of the Climategate scandal (two in each of the U.K. and
U.S.) came to the same general conclusion, although the review by Muir
Russell and his panel was the most comprehensive and definitive.
The Russell report findings will not sit well with most climate change
skeptics. After all, Climategate has become the No. 1 cause célèbre, the
principal rallying cry, the "Exhibit A" put forth by skeptics in their
ongoing efforts to discredit the scientific case for anthropogenic
global warming.
The ranks of scientific skeptics have, in fact, dwindled considerably in
recent years. The cumulative evidence for anthropogenic global warming
is now so broad, diverse and compelling that 98 per cent of 1,200
climate scientists recently surveyed believe in it.
Yet, skepticism will persist and will no doubt remain at the forefront
of public and political debates on climate change. To understand why is
to understand the real scandal of Climategate.
To the sober observer — the practising scientist — the content of the
leaked East Anglia emails appeared little more than the off-hand remarks
of colleagues who, like the rest of us, sometimes get frustrated. They
were hardly evidence of a scientific conspiracy, and certainly did not
warrant the outpouring of baseless, hostile accusations that followed.
When Climategate first broke, in fact, the editors of the pre-eminent
science journal Nature commented that these supposedly explosive
revelations would be laughable were it not for their political
consequences. Like many, the editors recognized that the real scandal
had little to do with the science, but everything to do with its
political ramifications.
Specifically, large swaths of the public and many opinion leaders
continue to doubt the reality of climate change. The reasons for this
are complicated, but a major factor is that uncertainties regarding the
status of climate science have been systematically exaggerated, and
controversies over the credibility of climate science have been
intentionally contrived.
The perpetrators of this misinformation about climate science include
diverse individuals and organizations, although most share either an
ideological resistance to government regulations or have vested economic
interests in carbon-intensive industries.
What we are witnessing , according to Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway,
authors of Merchants of Doubt, and James Hoggan and Richard Littlemore,
authors of Climate Cover-Up: The Crusade to Deny Global Warming, is a
similar but more ambitious replay of the tobacco industries’ campaign to
sow doubt about the scientific consensus on the health risks of smoking.
In both cases, the supposed "skeptics" of the science have understood
that politicians are reluctant to propose new regulations where the
public is uncertain about the need for such regulations.
Like Watergate, the real scandal of Climategate was not likely to be
found in the communications of those who had their emails illegally
hacked (or in the case of Watergate, their phones illegally tapped).
Rather, the real scandal can be found by looking to those who were
behind the hacking (or wire-tapping), in the first place, and to those
who have been so eager to butcher the truth and assault the professional
reputations of respected scientists for short-term political gain.
/Brad Walters is a professor of geography and co-ordinator of
environmental studies at Mount Allison University, New Brunswick./
Skeptics of global warming remind me alot of the evolution deniers. The whole teach the controversy attack plan has become increasing popular of late. Instead of improving their position with facts and evidence, critical analysis, they simply insult, belittle and spout idiocies to confuse the issue and try to make the scientific, factual side lose credibility. It seems there is no room for facts in this world anymore. The health care bill almost failed because of the delusional rants of republicans with there lies of death panels and other bazaar arguments. If only people could study the information on a subject deeply before making a conclusion (and defending that conclusion no matter what contradictory evidence becomes available) the world could actually make quick progress instead of having to fights for years and years just to gain an inch.
Well, recognizing Climategate is a scandal is a step in the right direction.
Are there any studies being done to see what, if any, effect the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is having on the warm summer? All those barrels of oil a day for almost 3 months. Some the consistancy of peanut butter. I think they were saying methane gas as well.
What makes me smile is the campaign against our oil sands in the U.S. You may have heard about it. Their shoreline, as shown on TV, is getting to be like a gooey mess of tar balls and they are knocking Alberta and telling people to stay away. It must smell lovely in the U.S. All they need to go with all that tar they have is some feathers. Those windmills for electricity should provide lots of feathers from the all birds they chop up.
That fix hasn't worked yet. The last pressure I heard was around 9,000 PSI. Over 600 atmospheres. Personally, I'd be worried about creating another leak further down the pipe, but it's simply not my problem.
Tweet
Comment